By joining the PACT OF THE FUTURE, America lost its sovereignty as a nation and is now under the rule of the United Nations.
DR. SHERRI TENPENNY VIDEO: 9/24/2024 - https://x.com/myhiddenvalue/status/1838699486958571987
KEY POINTS:
- Has 2 PARTS: #1 Science and Technology #2 Youth and Future
- Passed by “SILENCE PROCEDURE” - If no objection, you are automatically signed up. (America did not object).
- Accepted now by 193 countries in the world (out of 195). Accepted by our current admin.
- Fully digital and maximized for the control of the masses.
- Everyone will have a biometric digital ID that marks them as a global citizen.
- AI will fact check, enforce and punish perpetrators.
- Dissidents will be monitored, punished, and labelled misinformation, disinformation, malformation and memory holed.
- Punishments will include being locked out of ones bank account, unable to make certain purchases, unable to get on an airplane, subway or drive on public roads. (I'm sure additional punishments will be added in the future).
- This will be our future according to the world’s self-appointed overlords at the United Nations.
- These are unelected bureaucrats that are making decisions about our country, our sovereignty around the world.
- Nothing could be more important at this time than to get involved and get prepared.
- There was a Sept 17, 2024 Press Conference and no further action has been taken since that conference.
First of all,
this is not how contracts work lol. Express, explicit consent is required.
Second, we can just withdraw from the UN all together when Trump comes back. Because fuck the UN. I think we all know what to do if we see blue helmets... please don't post any glow anons
Technically (legally) the US has been Subject to the UN from day one of the UN (early 1940s). The Security Council has Ultimate Authority (legal Sovereignty) of the United States and all other countries who signed the UN (which is pretty much all). As just one example of the enumerated powers of the Treaty that we call the UN, they have conscription powers of almost every single person on the planet, including all people of the US, whenever the fuck they want. Most people don't realize that, since that has never happened in the US, but it has happened in some of the smaller countries on occasion.
These powers (and many more) were there from day one. This is how the UN was designed. It is absolutely the Sovereign of the World, and it has been for 80 years.
These new things that are happening are not "giving the UN Sovereignty," they already had it. These new things are just adding on specific enumerated powers so that people will see that the UN wants to have the powers they already have. In other words, these things are just for show. The powers are already there.
But what does it mean that the UN is "Sovereign"? Most people don't really understand what that means. And it is not straight forward, since it depends on which legal system you are looking at. Ultimately, Sovereignty is a function of Natural Law. By Natural Law every single Natural Person is Sovereign, and no one can be the Sovereign of another, whether they be other Natural Persons, or other incorporated entities (government e.g.).
But within any manmade legal system (and there are several in a semi-hierarchy), a Sovereign pretends to be the Ultimate Authority and enforces their pretense with coercion. You cannot be a Sovereign (other than yourself) by any other method. You can have a governor (which means, "to steer the ship,") by you cannot be a Sovereign, except by pretense and by force.
That's not really true. There is a scope in which it is true, but most of the really big contracts, the ones that really matter do not require explicit consent, but rather implicit consent. For example, the US Constitution, and the governmental corporation that it incorporates, is a Treaty, AKA a contract. I did not give my consent to enjoin that contract. On the contrary, I VERY MUCH do not want to be a part of that contract. I however do not have a choice. Well, there is always a choice, but I don't have an effective choice other than death, or being a part of a virtually identical contract with some other governmental corporation. I can't live in my home without being a part of the contract I didn't sign. Indeed, I can't even effectively live at all without being part of the contract I didn't sign. If were to try, the systems of force are so powerful, I would be squashed like an grasshopper in a crow convention.
Most people aren't even aware that they have enjoined the contract at all. They don't realize that they have given consent, thus it is implicit. And, as already stated, there is no exit clause.
We can. It is just a Treaty. However, doing so will have consequences. There are always consequences. Because of the Treaty, breaking the contract would be an act of war. That could end poorly.
Frankly, I think the only way to effectively end our participation in the Treaty is for the entire population to understand the scam that we call the UN, and how it was created by Rockefeller/Rothschild to create their One World Government, under their control.
Thanks for the corrections. After learning how bad it really is I think we need a bunch of nations to withdraw at the same time, or one after another after another. I hope that's in the cards. Surely this is a known element to the Plan. How can we prevent a one-world totalitarian socialist government if the UN is still standing? It will be a delayed creep right into it
We can't.
If it is not, quite frankly, we are fucked.
Excellent, detailed comment, and a great argument for Abolitionism / Voluntaryism (which might not be quite what you're going for, idk, but a truly civil society is the only way to free people from the tyranny you describe).
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "Abolitionism" or "Voluntaryism." You may not have meant it that way, but since you capitalized the terms, it suggests they are formal ideas/philosophies.
I am not advocating any specific "ism," rather, I am attempting to clarify a simple understanding of what Sovereignty is and how it has been convoluted. Our ubiquitous misunderstanding is caused by our purposefully designed systems of Civil Law (which itself, as an idea, is completely misunderstood by almost everyone). One of the greatest offenders of that system is that our current Civil Law purposefully obfuscates Natural Law. That is no where more potent than in our understanding of Sovereignty (or lack there of).
You cannot have both a true understanding of Sovereignty (who is really the Ultimate Authority) and our current system of Civil Law. They are completely incompatible. In other words, a "truly civil society" cannot exist without a ubiquitous fundamental understanding of an Individual's Sovereignty. Any other attempt to define Sovereignty other than the one defined by Natural Law subverts the fundamental nature of the Universe, and, in "civil society" is always (can only be) a power grab.
Civil Law can only be used as a guideline. Any other application becomes a subversion of Natural Law.
Another essential misunderstanding related to Natural Law that seems to be ubiquitous is that there are always consequences. There is no free lunch. People believe (mistakenly, because of purposeful fuckery) that if we didn't have the type of system of law that we have, there would be "lawlessness," "anarchy," and "chaos." Nothing could be further from the truth (not the least of which is that people don't understand what the word "anarchy" means, another purposeful fuckery). In truth, a "lawless" society cannot exist. There are always consequences.
These then are essential components of civility (if not necessarily a formal system of "civil society.") We must grok our Sovereignty (what everyone's Sovereignty is), what our Jurisdiction is (what everyone's Jurisdiction is), and that there are always consequences, no matter what anyone particular "law" (stated guidelines) may say about "allowed actions" or consequences.
With these things, which is a matter of reteaching people what they have been mistaught, our society, and the individuals made up of it, would be what we were always intentioned to be (whatever that may imply).
Auberon Herbert's writings are a good introduction to Voluntaryism, which is exactly what it sounds like:
The Right and Wrong of Compulsion by the State, and Other Essays
Back to your comment:
I agree wholeheartedly, and in fact I doubt there is very much that we DO disagree on.
Withdraw. Defund & banish the UN off our soil.
u/#glowie
The UN, UNICEF and NATO are controlled by the noses that control the world.
Until we get rid of the noses this won't end.
I can’t WAIT to see blue helmets.